EthoCRED: a framework to guide reporting and evaluation of the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity studies

Michael G. Bertram, Marlene Ågerstrand, Eli S.J. Thoré, Joel Allen, Sigal Balshine, Jack A. Brand, Bryan W. Brooks, ZhiChao Dang, Sabine Duquesne, Alex T. Ford, Frauke Hoffmann, Henner Hollert, Stefanie Jacob, Werner Kloas, Nils Klüver, Jim Lazorchak, Mariana Ledesma, Gerd Maack, Erin L. Macartney, Jake M. MartinSteven D. Melvin, Marcus Michelangeli, Silvia Mohr, Stephanie Padilla, Gregory Pyle, Minna Saaristo, René Sahm, Els Smit, Jeffery A. Steevens, Sanne van den Berg, Laura E. Vossen, Donald Wlodkowic, Bob B.M. Wong, Michael Ziegler, Tomas Brodin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Behavioural analysis has been attracting significant attention as a broad indicator of sub-lethal toxicity and has secured a place as an important subdiscipline in ecotoxicology. Among the most notable characteristics of behavioural research, compared to other established approaches in sub-lethal ecotoxicology (e.g. reproductive and developmental bioassays), are the wide range of study designs being used and the diversity of endpoints considered. At the same time, environmental hazard and risk assessment, which underpins regulatory decisions to protect the environment from potentially harmful chemicals, often recommends that ecotoxicological data be produced following accepted and validated test guidelines. These guidelines typically do not address behavioural changes, meaning that these, often sensitive, effects are not represented in hazard and risk assessments. Here, we propose a new tool, the EthoCRED evaluation method, for assessing the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity data, which considers the unique requirements and challenges encountered in this field. This method and accompanying reporting recommendations are designed to serve as an extension of the “Criteria for Reporting and Evaluating Ecotoxicity Data (CRED)” project. As such, EthoCRED can both accommodate the wide array of experimental design approaches seen in behavioural ecotoxicology, and could be readily implemented into regulatory frameworks as deemed appropriate by policy makers of different jurisdictions to allow better integration of knowledge gained from behavioural testing into environmental protection. Furthermore, through our reporting recommendations, we aim to improve the reporting of behavioural studies in the peer-reviewed literature, and thereby increase their usefulness
to inform chemical regulation.
Original languageEnglish
JournalBiological Reviews
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12 Oct 2024

Funding

This article was conceived at a workshop organised by the German Environment Agency (UBA) and financed by UBA and by Stockholm University. The authors thank Jason Magnuson (U.S. Geological Survey, USGS), Chris Kotalik (USGS), Meredith Nevers (USGS), Kimberly Jarema (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, US EPA), Gerald Ankley (US EPA), and Susan Cormier (US EPA) for their comments on the manuscript. We also thank the following agencies for financial support: the Swedish Research Council Formas (2020-02293 to M.G.B.; 2018-00828 to T.B.; 2022-02796 to J.M.M; 2022-00503 to M.M.), the Kempe Foundations (SMK-1954 and SMK21-0069 to M.G.B.; JCK22-0037 to T.B.), the Marie-Claire Cronstedt Foundation (to M.G.B.), the Australian Research Council (FT190100014, DP190100642, and DP220100245 to B.B.M.W.), the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (1P01ES028942 to B.W.B.), and the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sk\u0142odowska Curie grant agreement (101061889 to M.M). The authors have no competing financial interests to declare. The EthoCRED evaluation method for behavioural ecotoxicity studies was formulated by a group of 35 experts, having originally been conceived at a workshop organised by the German Environment Agency (UBA) and Stockholm University, titled \u201CThe behaviour of non\u2010target organisms after exposure to chemicals: possibilities of implementation in the regulatory process\u201D. This group of experts includes academic researchers working across the fields of behavioural ecology, ecotoxicology, aquatic and terrestrial ecology, environmental science, chemical regulation, risk assessment, and risk management. It also includes experts from a range of governmental institutions and agencies, including the German Environment Agency (UBA), the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), the Swedish Chemicals Agency (KemI), the Office of Research and Development (ORD) within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM, the Netherlands), and the Environment Protection Authority Victoria (EPA, Australia). When devising the EthoCRED evaluation method, the CRED method (Moermond ., 2016 ) was used as a foundation, and was chosen since it is already recommended for use in the EU Water Framework Directive (European Commission, 2018 ). Certain CRED evaluation criteria remained unchanged (i.e. have no behaviour\u2010specific guidance), while others were modified to fit the specific characteristics of behavioural studies, with additional behaviour\u2010specific criteria and reporting recommendations also being added. et al This article was conceived at a workshop organised by the German Environment Agency (UBA) and financed by UBA and by Stockholm University. The authors thank Jason Magnuson (U.S. Geological Survey, USGS), Chris Kotalik (USGS), Meredith Nevers (USGS), Kimberly Jarema (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, US EPA), Gerald Ankley (US EPA), and Susan Cormier (US EPA) for their comments on the manuscript. We also thank the following agencies for financial support: the Swedish Research Council Formas (2020\u201002293 to M.G.B.; 2018\u201000828 to T.B.; 2022\u201002796 to J.M.M; 2022\u201000503 to M.M.), the Kempe Foundations (SMK\u20101954 and SMK21\u20100069 to M.G.B.; JCK22\u20100037 to T.B.), the Marie\u2010Claire Cronstedt Foundation (to M.G.B.), the Australian Research Council (FT190100014, DP190100642, and DP220100245 to B.B.M.W.), the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (1P01ES028942 to B.W.B.), and the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sk\u0142odowska Curie grant agreement (101061889 to M.M). The authors have no competing financial interests to declare.

FundersFunder number
Stockholms Universitet
Susan Cormier
U.S. Geological Survey
Universidad de Buenos Aires
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment
Office of Research and Development
Umweltbundesamt
Marie-Claire Cronstedts Stiftelse
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu
Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung
Environment Protection Authority Victoria
German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment
Office of Research and Development, University of Botswana
Swedish Chemicals Agency
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Jason Magnuson
Australian Research CouncilDP220100245, DP190100642, FT190100014
National Institutes of Health1P01ES028942
Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas2020‐02293, 2018‐00828, 2022‐02796, 2022‐00503
European Commission101061889
KempestiftelsernaSMK‐1954, SMK21‐0069, JCK22‐0037

    Keywords

    • behaviour
    • chemical regulation
    • data evaluation
    • hazard assessment
    • policy
    • pollution
    • population relevance
    • reliability evaluation
    • risk assessment

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'EthoCRED: a framework to guide reporting and evaluation of the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this